Characteristics and Predictors of Late Right Heart Failure After Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation

Right heart failure with left ventricular assist devices: Preoperative, perioperative and postoperative management strategies. A clinical consensus statement of the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the ESC

Right heart failure (RHF) following implantation of a left ventricular assist device (LVAD) is a common and potentially serious condition with a wide spectrum of clinical presentations with an unfavourable effect on patient outcomes. Clinical scores that predict the occurrence of right ventricular (RV) failure have included multiple clinical, biochemical, imaging and haemodynamic parameters. However, unless the right ventricle is overtly dysfunctional with end-organ involvement, prediction of RHF post-LVAD implantation is, in most cases, difficult and inaccurate. For these reasons optimization of RV function in every patient is a reasonable practice aiming at preparing the right ventricle for a new and challenging haemodynamic environment after LVAD implantation. To this end, the institution of diuretics, inotropes and even temporary mechanical circulatory support may improve RV function, thereby preparing it for a better adaptation post-LVAD implantation. Furthermore, meticulous management of patients during the perioperative and immediate postoperative period should facilitate identification of RV failure refractory to medication. When RHF occurs late during chronic LVAD support, this is associated with worse long-term outcomes. Careful monitoring of RV function and characterization of the origination deficit should therefore continue throughout the patient's entire follow-up. Despite the useful information provided by the echocardiogram with respect to RV function, right heart catheterization frequently offers additional support for the assessment and optimization of RV function in LVAD-supported patients. In any patient candidate for LVAD therapy, evaluation and treatment of RV function and failure should be assessed in a multidimensional and multidisciplinary manner.

Occult right ventricular dysfunction and right ventricular-vascular uncoupling in left ventricular assist device recipients

BACKGROUND

Detecting right heart failure post left ventricular assist device (LVAD) is challenging. Sensitive pressure-volume loop assessments of right ventricle (RV) contractility may improve our appreciation of post-LVAD RV dysfunction.

METHODS

Thirteen LVAD patients and 20 reference (non-LVAD) subjects underwent comparison of echocardiographic, right heart cath hemodynamic, and pressure-volume loop-derived assessments of RV contractility using end-systolic elastance (Ees), RV afterload by effective arterial elastance (Ea), and RV-pulmonary arterial coupling (ratio of Ees/Ea).

RESULTS

LVAD patients had lower RV Ees (0.20 ± 0.08 vs 0.30 ± 0.15 mm Hg/ml, p = 0.01) and lower RV Ees/Ea (0.37 ± 0.14 vs 1.20 ± 0.54, p < 0.001) versus reference subjects. Low RV Ees correlated with reduced RV septal strain, an indicator of septal contractility, in both the entire cohort (r = 0.68, p = 0.004) as well as the LVAD cohort itself (r = 0.78, p = 0.02). LVAD recipients with low RV Ees/Ea (below the median value) demonstrated more clinical heart failure (71% vs 17%, p = 0.048), driven by an inability to augment RV Ees (0.22 ± 0.11 vs 0.19 ± 0.02 mm Hg/ml, p = 0.95) to accommodate higher RV Ea (0.82 ± 0.38 vs 0.39 ± 0.08 mm Hg/ml, p = 0.002). Pulmonary artery pulsatility index (PAPi) best identified low baseline RV Ees/Ea (≤0.35) in LVAD patients ((area under the curve) AUC = 0.80); during the ramp study, change in PAPi also correlated with change in RV Ees/Ea (r = 0.58, p = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

LVAD patients demonstrate occult intrinsic RV dysfunction. In the setting of excess RV afterload, LVAD patients lack the RV contractile reserve to maintain ventriculo-vascular coupling. Depression in RV contractility may be related to LVAD left ventricular unloading, which reduces septal contractility.

Right heart failure after durable left ventricular assist device implantation

INTRODUCTION

Right heart failure (RHF) is a well-known complication after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation and portends increased morbidity and mortality. Understanding the mechanisms and predictors of RHF in this clinical setting may offer ideas for early identification and aggressive management to minimize poor outcomes. A variety of medical therapies and mechanical circulatory support options are currently available for the management of post-LVAD RHF.

AREAS COVERED

We reviewed the existing definitions of RHF including its potential mechanisms in the context of durable LVAD implantation and currently available medical and device therapies. We performed a literature search using PubMed (from 2010 to 2023).

EXPERT OPINION

RHF remains a common complication after LVAD implantation. However, existing knowledge gaps limit clinicians' ability to adequately address its consequences. Early identification and management are crucial to reducing the risk of poor outcomes, but existing risk stratification tools perform poorly and have limited clinical applicability. This is an area ripe for investigation with the potential for major improvements in identification and targeted therapy in an effort to improve outcomes.

The Role of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning in the Prediction of Right Heart Failure after Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation: A Comprehensive Review

One of the most challenging and prevalent side effects of LVAD implantation is that of right heart failure (RHF) that may develop afterwards. The purpose of this study is to review and highlight recent advances in the uses of AI in evaluating RHF after LVAD implantation. The available literature was scanned using certain key words (artificial intelligence, machine learning, left ventricular assist device, prediction of right heart failure after LVAD) was scanned within Pubmed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases. Conventional risk scoring systems were also summarized, with their pros and cons being included in the results section of this study in order to provide a useful contrast with AI-based models. There are certain interesting and innovative ML approaches towards RHF prediction among the studies reviewed as well as more straightforward approaches that identified certain important predictive clinical parameters. Despite their accomplishments, the resulting AUC scores were far from ideal for these methods to be considered fully sufficient. The reasons for this include the low number of studies, standardized data availability, and lack of prospective studies. Another topic briefly discussed in this study is that relating to the ethical and legal considerations of using AI-based systems in healthcare. In the end, we believe that it would be beneficial for clinicians to not ignore these developments despite the current research indicating more time is needed for AI-based prediction models to achieve a better performance.

Pulmonary Vascular Resistance to Predict Right Heart Failure in Patients Undergoing Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation

Right heart failure (RHF) is associated with poor outcomes, especially in patients undergoing left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation. The aim of this study was to identify predictors of RHF after LVAD implantation. Of 129 consecutive patients (mean age 56 ± 11 years, 89% male) undergoing LVAD implantation, 34 developed RHF. Compared to patients without RHF, those with RHF required longer invasive mechanical ventilation and had longer intensive care unit and hospital stays (p < 0.01). One-year all-cause mortality was significantly higher in patients with versus without RHF after LVAD implantation (29.4% vs. 1.2%; hazard ratio 35.4; 95% confidence interval 4.5-277; p < 0.001). Mortality was highest in patients with delayed RHF after initial LVAD-only implantation (66.7%). Patients who did versus did not develop RHF had significantly higher baseline pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR; 404 ± 375 vs. 234 ± 162 dyn/s/cm5; p = 0.01). PVR > 250 dyn/s/cm5 was a significant predictor of survival in patients with RHF after LVAD implantation. These data confirm the negative impact of RHF on morbidity and mortality after LVAD implantation. Preoperative PVR > 250 dyn/s/cm5 determined using invasive right heart catheterization was an independent predictor of developing RHF after LVAD implantation, and of subsequent mortality, and could be used for risk stratification in the setting for deciding between single or biventricular support strategy.

Late Right Heart Failure After Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation: Contemporary Insights and Future Perspectives

Late right heart failure (RHF) is increasingly recognized in patients with long-term left ventricular assist device (LVAD) support and is associated with decreased survival and increased incidence of adverse events such as gastrointestinal bleeding and stroke. Progression of right ventricular (RV) dysfunction to clinical syndrome of late RHF in patients supported with LVAD is dependent on the severity of pre-existing RV dysfunction, persistent or worsening left- or right-sided valvular heart disease, pulmonary hypertension, inadequate or excessive left ventricular unloading, and/or progression of the underlying cardiac disease. RHF likely represents a continuum of risk with early presentation and progression to late RHF. However, de novo RHF develops in a subset of patients leading to increased diuretic requirement, arrhythmias, renal and hepatic dysfunction, and heart failure hospitalizations. The distinction between isolated late RHF and RHF due to left-sided contributions is lacking in registry studies and should be the focus of future registry data collection. Potential management strategies include optimization of RV preload and afterload, neurohormonal blockade, LVAD speed optimization, and treatment of concomitant valvular disease. In this review, the authors discuss definition, pathophysiology, prevention, and management of late RHF.